Nominees for Concordia Seminary President Announced

[Steven W Bohler]

Bishop,

FWIW, I don't think anything I wrote about either Tom or Joel ever came close to addressing worship matters. Of course, there is a strong heritage at CLS of OT exegetical scholars being quite apt students of (and advocates for) the liturgy. It sort of goes hand in glove with the subject matter of the OT, I guess. I think of the commanding influence of both Horace Hummel to Andrew Bartelt.

Last month, while perusing eBay for old Lutheran books, I found (and bought for about $15 w/shipping and tax) a copy of Mueller's "Christian Dogmatics" with Horace Hummel's name (and price he paid for the book) written on the inside cover.  Didn't need another copy of the book -- I have a couple -- but could not it pass up.  https://www.ebay.com/itm/Christian-Dogmatics-a-Handbook-of-Doctrinal-Theology-Mueller-hardcover-1934/293655214795?ssPageName=STRK%3AMEBIDX%3AIT&_trksid=p2060353.m2749.l2649

[Jim Butler]

Bishop,

FWIW, I don't think anything I wrote about either Tom or Joel ever came close to addressing worship matters. Of course, there is a strong heritage at CLS of OT exegetical scholars being quite apt students of (and advocates for) the liturgy. It sort of goes hand in glove with the subject matter of the OT, I guess. I think of the commanding influence of both Horace Hummel to Andrew Bartelt.

Last month, while perusing eBay for old Lutheran books, I found (and bought for about $15 w/shipping and tax) a copy of Mueller's "Christian Dogmatics" with Horace Hummel's name (and price he paid for the book) written on the inside cover.  Didn't need another copy of the book -- I have a couple -- but could not it pass up.  https://www.ebay.com/itm/Christian-Dogmatics-a-Handbook-of-Doctrinal-Theology-Mueller-hardcover-1934/293655214795?ssPageName=STRK%3AMEBIDX%3AIT&_trksid=p2060353.m2749.l2649

That's so cool! I'm a bit jealous!

[D. Engebretson]

Years ago, while still at the sem, I snagged a review copy of Vol. II of Christian Dogmatics by Pieper in English via a book auction. Is is labeled "Second Edition, 1942."  Inside the front cover is the handwritten name of Jaroslav Vajda.  On the facing inside page it is stamped "Editorial Department."  The volume is bound, but it is a typed copy, not typeset as for publishing. 

[Dave Benke]

So the Presidential selection is made two days from now on February 6, and the candidate list is at two, Lehenbauer and Egger. 

The Electors are:
The Board of Regents - one vote
The Chair of the Synod's Board of directors - one vote
The President of the District selected to be on the Board of Regents or his representative - one vote
The President of the Synod or his representative - one vote

The three individuals are, I believe, Revs. Michael Kumm, John Wille, and Matthew Harrison, or the latter two's representatives.  Harrison's representative is listed as LCMS 1st Vice-President Lange.

Back in the day the District President was simply the President of the district in which the school or seminary was located, so in terms of the seminaries - Indiana and Missouri.  But that changed along the way to a selectee from the Council of Presidents from any district. 

At any rate, prayers arise for them on Saturday for this most important decision.  The Board is meeting now, most likely virtually, or, since it's such an important meeting, whether an in-person meeting was held, with the other three coming in to be there in person for the election.

Dave Benke

[Jeremy_Loesch]

I saw a post from Todd Peperkorn, chair of the SL Regents that he was flying to SL for the election, so I think that it may be an in-person meeting, or at least a mix to accommodate various comfort levels.

And Pres. Meyers shared a beautiful devotion on Facebook regarding the election. I recall that Tom Egger's study karel was just down the row from mine in the basement of the library, so I feel like he and I are best buds. If I didn't campaign for him I would be a turncoat. Lol. The seminary will be in good hands with either man.

Jeremy

[Dave Benke]

I saw a post from Todd Peperkorn, chair of the SL Regents that he was flying to SL for the election, so I think that it may be an in-person meeting, or at least a mix to accommodate various comfort levels.

And Pres. Meyers shared a beautiful devotion on Facebook regarding the election. I recall that Tom Egger's study karel was just down the row from mine in the basement of the library, so I feel like he and I are best buds. If I didn't campaign for him I would be a turncoat. Lol. The seminary will be in good hands with either man.

Jeremy

Nice!  I've tossed this around in my head for awhile - always dangerous - and the way the process rolled out as the outside world saw it is I think critical.  The list from 44 to 7, and then to 2 with someone not on the list of 7 making the final 2.  What happened to the other 6 on the final 7?  Why did those 6 make the final 7 and stall out, and if the Board went backwards on their okeydokey of those 6, how many of the remaining 37 were considered?  For lack of a better term, that's odd.

I can with 99% assurance opine that your former best bud is about to become the President of Concordia St. Louis.  He will tell you when you see him that the word is "carrel" and not "karel," in order for him to locate you in his memory.  Of course, the Spirit leads, and both finalists live in St. Louis land.  But one is already in the house.  Blessings to the Electors in their important task of discernment and election on Saturday!

Dave Benke

[peter_speckhard]

I saw a post from Todd Peperkorn, chair of the SL Regents that he was flying to SL for the election, so I think that it may be an in-person meeting, or at least a mix to accommodate various comfort levels.

And Pres. Meyers shared a beautiful devotion on Facebook regarding the election. I recall that Tom Egger's study karel was just down the row from mine in the basement of the library, so I feel like he and I are best buds. If I didn't campaign for him I would be a turncoat. Lol. The seminary will be in good hands with either man.

Jeremy

Nice!  I've tossed this around in my head for awhile - always dangerous - and the way the process rolled out as the outside world saw it is I think critical.  The list from 44 to 7, and then to 2 with someone not on the list of 7 making the final 2.  What happened to the other 6 on the final 7?  Why did those 6 make the final 7 and stall out, and if the Board went backwards on their okeydokey of those 6, how many of the remaining 37 were considered?  For lack of a better term, that's odd.

I can with 99% assurance opine that your former best bud is about to become the President of Concordia St. Louis.  He will tell you when you see him that the word is "carrel" and not "karel," in order for him to locate you in his memory.  Of course, the Spirit leads, and both finalists live in St. Louis land.  But one is already in the house.  Blessings to the Electors in their important task of discernment and election on Saturday!

Dave Benke

Given that any public explanation of sensitive things will be worthlessly vague-- "he left to spend more time with his family" "we felt he would be better suited to a different kind of ministry" etc. we then end up having to read between the lines, and it is always possible to read between the lines in ways that reinforce our prior assumptions. When we're on the committee or when things seem to be going a way we agree with, we ask where is the trust. The problem is all the naysayers who won't let the system work as designed and the process play out. When we're not on the committee or when we don't like the direction, we ask where is the transparency. The problem is the clique of insiders up to their political shenanigans.

My sense in this case is that nobody could possibly have a reason not to be trying to get the best person they can get, so I assume that is what they're doing. And given the general state of things with institutions, whoever they get is going to need all the help, luck, skill, and divine intervention available.

[Dave Benke]

I saw a post from Todd Peperkorn, chair of the SL Regents that he was flying to SL for the election, so I think that it may be an in-person meeting, or at least a mix to accommodate various comfort levels.

And Pres. Meyers shared a beautiful devotion on Facebook regarding the election. I recall that Tom Egger's study karel was just down the row from mine in the basement of the library, so I feel like he and I are best buds. If I didn't campaign for him I would be a turncoat. Lol. The seminary will be in good hands with either man.

Jeremy

Given that any public explanation of sensitive things will be worthlessly vague-- "he left to spend more time with his family" "we felt he would be better suited to a different kind of ministry" etc. we then end up having to read between the lines, and it is always possible to read between the lines in ways that reinforce our prior assumptions. When we're on the committee or when things seem to be going a way we agree with, we ask where is the trust. The problem is all the naysayers who won't let the system work as designed and the process play out. When we're not on the committee or when we don't like the direction, we ask where is the transparency. The problem is the clique of insiders up to their political shenanigans.

My sense in this case is that nobody could possibly have a reason not to be trying to get the best person they can get, so I assume that is what they're doing. And given the general state of things with institutions, whoever they get is going to need all the help, luck, skill, and divine intervention available.   

Nice!  I've tossed this around in my head for awhile - always dangerous - and the way the process rolled out as the outside world saw it is I think critical.  The list from 44 to 7, and then to 2 with someone not on the list of 7 making the final 2.  What happened to the other 6 on the final 7?  Why did those 6 make the final 7 and stall out, and if the Board went backwards on their okeydokey of those 6, how many of the remaining 37 were considered?  For lack of a better term, that's odd.

I can with 99% assurance opine that your former best bud is about to become the President of Concordia St. Louis.  He will tell you when you see him that the word is "carrel" and not "karel," in order for him to locate you in his memory.  Of course, the Spirit leads, and both finalists live in St. Louis land.  But one is already in the house.  Blessings to the Electors in their important task of discernment and election on Saturday!

Dave Benke

I agree with this post.  Thank you for repeating it.

Dave Benke

[peter_speckhard]

I saw a post from Todd Peperkorn, chair of the SL Regents that he was flying to SL for the election, so I think that it may be an in-person meeting, or at least a mix to accommodate various comfort levels.

And Pres. Meyers shared a beautiful devotion on Facebook regarding the election. I recall that Tom Egger's study karel was just down the row from mine in the basement of the library, so I feel like he and I are best buds. If I didn't campaign for him I would be a turncoat. Lol. The seminary will be in good hands with either man.

Jeremy

Given that any public explanation of sensitive things will be worthlessly vague-- "he left to spend more time with his family" "we felt he would be better suited to a different kind of ministry" etc. we then end up having to read between the lines, and it is always possible to read between the lines in ways that reinforce our prior assumptions. When we're on the committee or when things seem to be going a way we agree with, we ask where is the trust. The problem is all the naysayers who won't let the system work as designed and the process play out. When we're not on the committee or when we don't like the direction, we ask where is the transparency. The problem is the clique of insiders up to their political shenanigans.

My sense in this case is that nobody could possibly have a reason not to be trying to get the best person they can get, so I assume that is what they're doing. And given the general state of things with institutions, whoever they get is going to need all the help, luck, skill, and divine intervention available.   

Nice!  I've tossed this around in my head for awhile - always dangerous - and the way the process rolled out as the outside world saw it is I think critical.  The list from 44 to 7, and then to 2 with someone not on the list of 7 making the final 2.  What happened to the other 6 on the final 7?  Why did those 6 make the final 7 and stall out, and if the Board went backwards on their okeydokey of those 6, how many of the remaining 37 were considered?  For lack of a better term, that's odd.

I can with 99% assurance opine that your former best bud is about to become the President of Concordia St. Louis.  He will tell you when you see him that the word is "carrel" and not "karel," in order for him to locate you in his memory.  Of course, the Spirit leads, and both finalists live in St. Louis land.  But one is already in the house.  Blessings to the Electors in their important task of discernment and election on Saturday!

Dave Benke

I agree with this post.  Thank you for repeating it.

Dave Benke

Whoops! Fixed it upstream.

[Dave Benke]

I saw a post from Todd Peperkorn, chair of the SL Regents that he was flying to SL for the election, so I think that it may be an in-person meeting, or at least a mix to accommodate various comfort levels.

And Pres. Meyers shared a beautiful devotion on Facebook regarding the election. I recall that Tom Egger's study karel was just down the row from mine in the basement of the library, so I feel like he and I are best buds. If I didn't campaign for him I would be a turncoat. Lol. The seminary will be in good hands with either man.

Jeremy

Given that any public explanation of sensitive things will be worthlessly vague-- "he left to spend more time with his family" "we felt he would be better suited to a different kind of ministry" etc. we then end up having to read between the lines, and it is always possible to read between the lines in ways that reinforce our prior assumptions. When we're on the committee or when things seem to be going a way we agree with, we ask where is the trust. The problem is all the naysayers who won't let the system work as designed and the process play out. When we're not on the committee or when we don't like the direction, we ask where is the transparency. The problem is the clique of insiders up to their political shenanigans.

My sense in this case is that nobody could possibly have a reason not to be trying to get the best person they can get, so I assume that is what they're doing. And given the general state of things with institutions, whoever they get is going to need all the help, luck, skill, and divine intervention available.   

Nice!  I've tossed this around in my head for awhile - always dangerous - and the way the process rolled out as the outside world saw it is I think critical.  The list from 44 to 7, and then to 2 with someone not on the list of 7 making the final 2.  What happened to the other 6 on the final 7?  Why did those 6 make the final 7 and stall out, and if the Board went backwards on their okeydokey of those 6, how many of the remaining 37 were considered?  For lack of a better term, that's odd.

I can with 99% assurance opine that your former best bud is about to become the President of Concordia St. Louis.  He will tell you when you see him that the word is "carrel" and not "karel," in order for him to locate you in his memory.  Of course, the Spirit leads, and both finalists live in St. Louis land.  But one is already in the house.  Blessings to the Electors in their important task of discernment and election on Saturday!

Dave Benke

I agree with this post.  Thank you for repeating it.

Dave Benke

Whoops! Fixed it upstream.

The problem is the clique of insiders up to their political shenanigans.

My sense in this case is that nobody could possibly have a reason not to be trying to get the best person they can get, so I assume that is what they're doing. And given the general state of things with institutions, whoever they get is going to need all the help, luck, skill, and divine intervention available.

It's possible that it could be a "clique of insiders up to their political shenanigans."    The back-and-forth push-pull by the board within their own lists in terms of subtraction, cut-down and then addition give impetus to that impression.   Of course, who really knows the lowdown inside scoop stuff - you?  Maybe but doubtful.  Will and/or Larry?  Much more interior currency between them.  Me?  Definitely not. 

The variable is what is meant by "the best person."   I remember upstream just opining that between the two finalists there's a definite experience, theological and synodical exposure set favoring one of them to be "the best person."  And a hail of interrogatories ensued.  How dare you! 

That being said, the die has, in my opinion, been cast, and Professor Egger will be given all the help, luck, additional skill and prayers for divine intervention that all of us should offer when he is President-Elect Egger tomorrow.

Dave Benke

[peter_speckhard]

I saw a post from Todd Peperkorn, chair of the SL Regents that he was flying to SL for the election, so I think that it may be an in-person meeting, or at least a mix to accommodate various comfort levels.

And Pres. Meyers shared a beautiful devotion on Facebook regarding the election. I recall that Tom Egger's study karel was just down the row from mine in the basement of the library, so I feel like he and I are best buds. If I didn't campaign for him I would be a turncoat. Lol. The seminary will be in good hands with either man.

Jeremy

Given that any public explanation of sensitive things will be worthlessly vague-- "he left to spend more time with his family" "we felt he would be better suited to a different kind of ministry" etc. we then end up having to read between the lines, and it is always possible to read between the lines in ways that reinforce our prior assumptions. When we're on the committee or when things seem to be going a way we agree with, we ask where is the trust. The problem is all the naysayers who won't let the system work as designed and the process play out. When we're not on the committee or when we don't like the direction, we ask where is the transparency. The problem is the clique of insiders up to their political shenanigans.

My sense in this case is that nobody could possibly have a reason not to be trying to get the best person they can get, so I assume that is what they're doing. And given the general state of things with institutions, whoever they get is going to need all the help, luck, skill, and divine intervention available.   

Nice!  I've tossed this around in my head for awhile - always dangerous - and the way the process rolled out as the outside world saw it is I think critical.  The list from 44 to 7, and then to 2 with someone not on the list of 7 making the final 2.  What happened to the other 6 on the final 7?  Why did those 6 make the final 7 and stall out, and if the Board went backwards on their okeydokey of those 6, how many of the remaining 37 were considered?  For lack of a better term, that's odd.

I can with 99% assurance opine that your former best bud is about to become the President of Concordia St. Louis.  He will tell you when you see him that the word is "carrel" and not "karel," in order for him to locate you in his memory.  Of course, the Spirit leads, and both finalists live in St. Louis land.  But one is already in the house.  Blessings to the Electors in their important task of discernment and election on Saturday!

Dave Benke

I agree with this post.  Thank you for repeating it.

Dave Benke

Whoops! Fixed it upstream.

The problem is the clique of insiders up to their political shenanigans.

My sense in this case is that nobody could possibly have a reason not to be trying to get the best person they can get, so I assume that is what they're doing. And given the general state of things with institutions, whoever they get is going to need all the help, luck, skill, and divine intervention available.

It's possible that it could be a "clique of insiders up to their political shenanigans."    The back-and-forth push-pull by the board within their own lists in terms of subtraction, cut-down and then addition give impetus to that impression.   Of course, who really knows the lowdown inside scoop stuff - you?  Maybe but doubtful.  Will and/or Larry?  Much more interior currency between them.  Me?  Definitely not. 

The variable is what is meant by "the best person."   I remember upstream just opining that between the two finalists there's a definite experience, theological and synodical exposure set favoring one of them to be "the best person."  And a hail of interrogatories ensued.  How dare you! 

That being said, the die has, in my opinion, been cast, and Professor Egger will be given all the help, luck, additional skill and prayers for divine intervention that all of us should offer when he is President-Elect Egger tomorrow.

Dave Benke

Certainly me. I do know Todd Peperkorn from my first year of sem in Ft. Wayne, but I haven't had any communication with him in years, at least since I got off social media and to my memory even before then. That is about as inside as I get.

What would a clique of political insiders gain by choosing the sem president in a shenanigan-infused way? Is it a cush job with potential kick-backs? A payoff of old political debts? Neither of those seem even remotely plausible to me. Is there some crucial, politicized policy decision that this person will be i charge of making? What is it? And what which guy is on which side of that? Beats me.

The "how dare you" of the previous statement that Egger was by far the inferior candidate was not to make a statement about the qualities of the candidates but about the appropriateness of the comment. Such a post had almost zero chance of being helpful (unless the committee reads your posts in this forum and might use them to influence the decision, in which case a direct email to those people expressing the opinion provately would have been far more valuable) and a very good chance of being unhelpful, as it would paint the committee in a very suspicious light and hamstring the new president in terms of his reputation should Egger get the nod, which you now seem convinced is a fait accompli. The comment seemed to inject negative political angle to the process for no reason. 

[Dave Benke]

Well, we all hope that everyone of influence and true mustard in Lutheranism today reads the ALPB Forum Online.  It should be a "must" on a daily basis, no? 

In my individual case, the value of my promotion of a person among elected officials in our lovely denomination can with great accuracy be viewed as inversely proportional to their chances.  So when it comes to Joel Lehenbauer, I wish to apologize to him and his family.  His dreams of seminary presidency were most likely crushed by my endorsement, or as it should be called, the kiss of death.

Welcome, Second Cousin Tom Egger, to your destiny.  (Maybe I shouldn't have let that cat out of the bag just yet, but perhaps the Missouri elites are having an early Scotch and cigar.)

Dave Benke

[PrTim15]

You're great Dave:)

[Steven W Bohler]

You're great Dave:)

Well, he certainly thinks so. 

[peter_speckhard]

I think Dave deliberately sabotaged Lehenbaurer with his endorsement in order to get his family connection into the job.